And what does it matter what you believe?

“Physical evidence has been collected (ever heard of Ted Phillips)”

Show me then. I predict you will fail because all you have as evidence of this alleged physical evidence are storytales of alleged evidence.

“But I think anyone who approaches the subject with a open mind would think that the totality of the evidence suggests it is very likely something is going on”

Of course they would but the problem is that there is no evidence.

“Obviously you don’t”

Because obviously you and I know there is no evidence to do any “convincing” with.

“I’m fairly certain any time I spend trying to convince you otherwise will just be time wasted”

Sounds like you have already wasted your time already. The fact is, I am very easy to convince. All you have to do is show me some evidence. Note I said “show” — not tell, but show. You can sit there and quote all your most favorite UFO evidence fairytales all day long, but I’m only interested in facts, not fairytales, yet fairytales is all you seem to have. I am not so easily persuaded by poorly told and contradictory fairytales as you seem to be so I would suggest a different approach, say a more scientific and logical one for example.

This is funny! Why is it that all kinds of believers get out into the field, yet everyone of them come home empty handed, yet they still insist on believing anyway? Who is demonstrating more common logical sense here — the believers who get out into the field and return empty handed yet refuse to quit believing, or the skeptics waiting back at home for the believers to return with something other than a complete vacuum of evidence? Just because someone gets out into a field does not mean they know any more or less than someone who does not get out into a field. That is a logical fallacy. What demonstrates someone knows more are the verifiable facts they can cite.